The South Carolina Democratic Party Executive Board rejected Judge Vic Rawl's official protest to the results of last week's U.S. Senate primary, despite no evidence presented that the results were accurate, and despite Alvin Greene having not even shown up to the protest hearing. Rawl had originally filed his protest based, in large part, on the "well-documented unreliability and unverifiability of the voting machines used in South Carolina."

Greene's election as the Democratic party nominee for the U.S. Senate, to run against incumbent Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, stands. The vote of the Executive Board was 38.5 to 7.5 in favor of rejecting Rawl's protest and upholding the results. Not kidding.

The Rawl campaign presented an impressive five-hour case in Columbia today, including two computer scientists and security experts who both asserted that there was no reasonable explanation for election results other than some kind of voting system malfunction in either the hardware or software. Voters testified that they had trouble selecting Rawl on the ES&S iVotronic touch-screen systems, and that their votes were flipped to Greene. Campaign workers testified that they received calls all throughout Election Day concerning problems with the machines and reports that pollworkers were swapping out sensitive memory cartridges.

Despite the historical record of failure of the ES&S voting system, and numerous state-sponsored studies (in state's other than SC) which all found that the systems are poorly coded and exceptionally vulnerable to malicious manipulation, Rawl's team of computer scientists were not allowed access to the voting system hardware and software in order to examine it for bugs or tampering.

Rawl's attorney instructed the Executive Board that they were required to vote on the protest on the basis of whether the evidence presented in the hearing demonstrated the results to be true and accurate or not. No evidence was presented that the results were accurate, only that they were not. Nonetheless, the SC Democratic Party's Executive Board voted resoundingly to reject Rawl's protest, which the candidate has said he will not appeal.

After the motion was rejected, and the meeting adjourned, Rawl quieted the crowd to say a few words (the following is now transcribed directly from the audio)...

RAWL: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk to you, I'm gonna take about two minutes of your time. This is not about me. This is not about Republicans. This is not about blacks, it is not about whites. It's about the sanctity of our electorial process and the only thing that I can do here today in the time frame allowable, which is ten days --- this is a Democratic primary, this is absolutely not a general election --- we cannot seize, legally, the machines. We don't have the ability nor the power to go back through and look at everything as people would request us to do. If this were a general election, perhaps we could have done that. We were allowed ten days and ten days only.

What I would like to see the party do is to correct its rules to take this into consideration, since they've had plenty of time to do so over the past...I believe Mr. Frazier is now running his 15th or 16th term...Uh, ladies and gentlemen, this is not about the Democratic Party. This is about the opportunity to do something that is necessary in my opinion, and to look at, as an issue that has been around for a while, that the politics and the statehouse is not going to address, considering the make-up of who is there, and because of the rights and the power that they have.

This is the only opportunity that I had to bring it before a group of people who have the best interest of the Democratic Party and the state of South Carolina in their hearts and minds.

I appreciate the opportunity to present it. I did present it to the best of my ability and the best ability of my staff. I thank them profusely, from the bottom of my heart. They have done absolutely magnificent things, with little time and little money. Thank you very much.

REPORTER QUESTION: Will you appeal this decision?

RAWL: No! I'm not gonna talk any more. Thank you very much. [applause]

Wow. See our entire LIVE BLOG of the full proceedings below...

* * *

Below is the LIVE streaming broadcast of the protest hearing being held right now in Columbia, SC, before the state's Democratic Party executive board, concerning the bizarre results of last week's Democratic U.S. Senate primary. Judge Vic Rawl has filed a protest alleging "systemic software problems" within the state's oft-failed, easily-manipulated 100% unverifiable ES&S iVotronic e-vote system, leading to results that show the jobless, unknown Alvin Greene having defeated him by 59% to 41%...

8:21pm ET: There are 92 members of the SC Dem Party exec board, though many are not there. Votes strongly in favor, so far, of REJECTING the protest and upholding the election of Alvin Greene, despite NO evidence presented that the election results were accurate...

8:12pm ET: Taking voice vote on whether to REJECT the protest, and thus to uphold the election results. (Geez, could they be any more confusing about this?!)

8:05pm ET: Woman member: I couldn't let only white folks speak up. I believe what happened was deeply flawed. If we react on emotion, and not based on the law, how does that make us any different than the Republicans? Depending on results of this motion, there may be more anger. Suggest we make a decision, vote it up or down, and then focus on November, because that's what's important. If we spend our time fighting about this in the courts.... we are all deeply conflicted. But we've got to move on. As we continue to debate, the GOP continues to mount a fall campaign. (She gets round of applause. Seems to be in favor of REJECT Rawl's motion.)

8:04pm ET: Male board member (didn't get name) to speak against Rejecting motion: What do we do if we make a decision that runs contrary to the election. This thing is like a dog chewing it's own tail. Could go for a long time and we don't have the time for that.

8:02pm ET: Woman (did not catch name) It does come down to the machines. In '08 SC League of Women Voters told commission: "You have flawed machines, seriously flawed machines." We have a candidate at this moment who has shown respect to the SC Dem Party. (Implies Greene didn't show up at any party events, conventions, or even at hearing today.)

8:01pm ET: "Mr. Fowler": Against protest and overturning election. Any fair understanding of how voters make decisions, one cannot likely conclude we would have gotten a result of 60/40. Despite of this, not enough evidence shown that election would be overturned by flaws. (Carolyn Fowler is state party chair, don't know if "Mr. Fowler" is related.)

7:57pm ET: A member moves to deny, reject the protest and to urge Rawl to seek judicial relief instead. Another member speaks in favor of protest: This election is flawed, our system is flawed because there is no paper trail. They have shown us with preponderance of evidence, that election can be rigged. I say we deny motion, and uphold the protest.

7:55pm ET: Now back in open session.

7:23pm ET: Closed session will be to deliberate with lawyers, to determine legal standards of how to proceed. Currently recessed during that closed Executive Session. Vote will (presumably) occur on whether to accept or reject Rawl's protest to the election results afterwords. If so, will a new election be run? That's what Rawl's camp is asking for. We wait...

7:20pm ET: Chair takes vote on whether to go into executive session (presumably, a closed session). Vote is very close on that! Takes a recount! Goes to voice vote to find out for sure. Looks like closed session wins! Recess for private Executive Session.

7:16pm ET: Q: What is your request? Nettles: I request is you find this election invalid, and order a new primary for the U.S. Senate.

7:15pm ET: Nettles: We presented expert review of data and stats. This is an anomaly, not right. If someone else says results are inaccurate because of machines, they'd have to prove that it was the machine's fault, as we did.

7:14pm ET: Nettles: Does the SC Dem Party want Alvin Greene to run for U.S. Senate?

7:12pm ET: Nettles: These thing happened across the country. When you see these things, all the experts agree, something's wrong, there's a flaw in the program. Whatever decision executive comm. makes, it has to be based on the evidence in this case. What evidence have you heard today that this was a true, valid election? None. (That's true also because Greene didn't even show up, nobody represented his side. - BF)

7:10pm ET: Nettles: Summarizes the expert testimony, and theories of what could have happened that were dismissed by statistical studies. Focusing on only a problem with the machines left. "When there is no paper trail, you can't have a recount. You're only going to get what was printed out the first time. On absentee precincts, you can have a recount."

7:09pm ET: This is not a criminal standard. We don't have to prove what happened, just that something ruined results. When you eliminate all other possibilities as to what went wrong, you are left with only one possible solution.

7:04pm ET: The standard is that if you find enough questions about validity of this election that could change the results of this election, that's the standard.

7:03pm ET: Nettles notes the only question is whether this election, not others on the ballots, should be thrown out. If board grants request, it'll be a two man race for Senate primary.

6:58pm ET: [Notes during pause here: For the record, I've been trying to live Tweet these proceedings via @TheBradBlog. If you're not a follower! Please do! Also, we are supported by reader donations! Please feel free to DONATE HERE!]

6:44pm ET: Q: Were the passwords stored on the machines accessible? Expert Buell: We don't know the answer. The state elections commission would have the answer.

6:43pm ET: Q: How does replacing memory cards in middle of race effect the process? Expert Abrams: Haven't run experiments, but according to ES&S manual, you can't close machine if a different card than the one when it was opened. If you do, you lose the data on the cards.

6:38pm ET: Ludwig: I've run state elections, I've run local elections. I've never seen anything like this before. Greene ran no campaign. Rawl had a very aggressive campaign. There's never been anything like this, since running campaigns in SC since 1996 that compares.

6:32pm ET: Q: Is there a way to check for programming errors? Comp. Expert Buell: Only way to check for programming errors is to conduct extensive tests. Thousands of lines of codes. Ballots are programmed differently for each election, so it's a moving target.

6:30pm ET: Comp Expert Buell: Actual data will be lost in next day or so, due to upcoming run-off election! (GET COURT ORDER TO KEEP DATA!!! - BF)

6:29pm ET: Is there more research that could be done if there were more time? Comp Expert Buell: Yes. FL did a very narrow study after probs in '06 election. CA SoS ordered a more thorough study. OH did a study and decertified the machines. One problem doing that research is that software and hard are considered proprietary.

6:27pm ET: Chair Q: Did you personally test hardware and software of machines used in election? Comp Expert Abrams: I went to examine them, but officials refused to let me do so. We had the technology, but were thwarted by the county.

6:26pm ET: Rawl Cmpgn Mgr Ludwig: If we had paper ballots, we could go back and count them. But we don't have that. So we can't tell you what went wrong.

6:25pm ET: Rawl Cmpgn Mgr Ludwig: We're not asserting they were hacked. We don't know what happened. We know the results are wrong. Don't know it was malicious hack. Could be a mistake, a hack. These machines are incredibly frail. We just know the results were wrong.

6:22pm ET: Expert Abrams: 42 out of 46 counties have data on ballots prepared by SC Election Comm. If there was a problem at that commission, then basically all the counties could have a problem because of that one problem --- due to malicious code or a mistake. Expert Buell: Let me corroborate that. A bug could propagate statewide if only one place sets up all the systems.

6:18pm ET: Chair Q: We all recognize computers and voting machines are subject to error. Is it expected to get reasonable results in all races accept U.S. Sen race in Democratic primary? How can this be explained? Expert Buell: In software with bugs, its not that uncommon that one particular flaw stands out. I don't find that to be an unusual kind of event. If somebody were to tamper with machines, you'd expect one change, and not the rest.

6:13pm ET: Chair Q: If vote tampering could have happened, what other evidence do we have other than results of this election? Expert Buell: I don't think that we do. Many of the studies have shown that the security is very very low. Code can be tampered with a bug, and then self-erase itself on way out. Virtually every study has shown how it can be done. So it looks like original software was there when investigating after election.

6:10pm ET: Chair Q: Could a hacker cause totals to simply be reversed? Answer from Abrams: Could be done in one of two ways. Could have hacked into software that produces ballots, or it could be done on the tabulation software on the Unity computers were the votes were being computed. If someone had hacked them, it would be a fairly easy job.

6:08pm ET: Chair Q: Any physical evidence that shows voting machines were connected to Internet on Election Day. Answer from Abrams: I don't know that voting machines were elected, but clearly Unity (tabulator computers) were connected.

6:06pm ET: Chair: If machines were flawed or corrupted, why was this the only race corrupted? Abrams: Is possible that there was only a bug, or a hack on a single line on a ballot. Assumption is there was a problem with just the Senate race.

6:02pm ET: Chair asked if any witnesses were paid, and if so, how much. Expert witness Abrams says he wasn't paid yet, but hourly rate is $100/hour. Estimates maybe 7 days, 4 hours a day for investigation, not for testimony. No other witnesses raise hand to say they were paid.

6:01pm ET: Someone asks if all this is true then ALL the machines in SC "are bad". Chair says only question here is whether protest should be accepted, and if so, what is remedy.

6:00pm ET: During short pause, I'll note that the Rawl campaign MUST get a court order to get all memory cards and machine chips quarantined immediately before they are scrubbed!

5:57pm ET: Rawl attorney Nettles completes presentation. Witnesses still in room for questioning from members of SC Dem Party exec board.

5:53pm ET: Joan Weigel from Lexington Cty. Voted for Gov first, went to second race, hit Rawl's name, it lit up, went to 3rd race and went to confirm and GREENE's name had a check mark by it! (This is a very familiar prob with ES&S iVotronic probs reported in the past!)

5:52pm ET: Voter (a teacher, but I missed the name) says Rawl was not on the ballot at all.

5:49pm ET: Susan Turner, voter, college teacher: Tried to vote for Gov., got a "grey screen" and then a vote for Alvin Greene, Senate lit up!

5:47pm ET: Ann: Trouble with machines reported all day long. Memory cards had to be changed in the middle of voting (oy!)

5:45pm ET: Ann: Affidavits that Rawl wasn't even on the ballot in some cases. Didn't have reports of reverse happening (attempts to vote for Greene, but Rawl lighted up).

5:44pm ET: Abrams finishes. Ann ????, a campaign worker takes stand to testify to problems received from voters on Election Day. Voters tried to "repeatedly press it" for Rawl "4 to 6 times" and it wouldn't light up. "They tried and pressed Greene and it did light up".

5:41pm ET: Abrams: Some flash cards sent to Rice U. Found no individual ballots on flash cards. One more link in the chain that we cannot verify.

5:40pm ET: Abrams: I don't believe results a "true accurate count of vote" and "no way to verify" whether it is.

5:39pm ET: Abrams: No independent paper record of vote totals. Only software totals.

5:37pm ET: Abrams: Berkley (sic?) County "Unity" computers, the tabulators, were hooked to the Internet (despite dangers of accessing these machines via Internet). Would be possible for someone to alter the vote via Internet.

5:34pm ET: Abrams: Hired to look at software, flash cards. Wasn't allowed to. (if I heard that correctly). Would be very easy for a voter to tamper with computer in many different aspects.

5:28pm ET: Buell: These machines should be used with an enormous amount of skeptism. It's entirely reasonable to believe if we got a surprising result, that something went wrong with software. None of the external reviews have found these machines acceptable.

5:23pm ET: Buell: Federal testing authorities do no tests of software or counting of votes.

5:18pm ET: Buell: Has reviewed all academic reviews of e-voting machines. Especially Ohio's EVEREST report and FSU's study. These machines are "exactly the type of programming a student shouldn't do... If password routines were done by a Senior student, we wouldn't give him a passing grade. One password was stored in the software, and was same password used on every machine ... you absolutely do not store passwords in the sourcecode!"

5:02pm ET: Racial preference doesn't explain discrepancy either, according to more experts at FiveThirtyEight.com and SwingStateProject blog. "No relationship between race and results in counties".

5:01pm ET: We did not start at "50/50" as some have said. Rawl did actual campaigning, Greene did not. Ballot order does not explain discrepancy, since Greene was first on absentee paper ballots too.

4:56pm ET: Ludwig: If inauditable Election Day totals were equal in percentage to absentee paper ballots, Rawl would have won.

4:53pm ET: Ludwig: Paper-based absentee ballots had disparity with Election Day ES&S voting machine ballots in many counties. Nothing even close occurred in any other race on the Dem ballot. Rawl won in absentees, lost on Election Day.

4:45pm ET: Rawl attorney Truet Nettles (sp?) begins case: "Results not true, do not reflect majority of votes. ... Will show committee real math, real statistics and real explanations of what SC voters really wanted to do ... Will have presentation from Professor Buell and Steve Abrams, forensic expert in computers, testimony from staff about what happened on Election Day and voters as to what happened when voters tried to vote for Rawl. All the evidence today shows that is not a valid, true result of the way voters voted."

4:41pm ET: Greene NOT at protest, apparently. Was given "every opportunity" to be in the room today. Chair says she had folks tell him personally that the proceedings were important.

4:39pm: ET: Back in session.

4:27pm ET: Taking a five minute recess. Rawl/Greene protest should take place after break.

4:25pm ET: Motion passes, so they are voting on whether to REJECT the U.S. House race protest (Senate protest coming up next). Motion to REJECT protest of U.S. House race, on grounds that there are not enough problems reported to change the results of the election.

4:24pm ET: Now voting on whether they have enough members of the Exec Board present to vote on whether they can vote on changing results of an election. That motion passes.

4:22pm ET: Live stream is now back!!

4:12pm ET:Rawl camp just told me:"There's a protest in front of us --- will go up when ours starts." I recommended they get back on air now instead!

3:53pm ET:I've sent a note to the Rawl camp to let them know the feed is suddenly "off air", if they don't know. Hopefully it'll get back up shortly! House race was still being protested, so I don't think the Rawl/Greene Senate race protest has begun yet...

3:45pm ET:Live feed just stopped for some reason...

3:33pm ET: First up is a protest concerning a U.S. House race. Rawl's protest will come second today.

THRILLED this is being streamed!! (Dream come true for the likes of me, really.) Thank you, Vic Rawl! You are WAY ahead of the piss-poor strategy shown by your ES&S shafted predecessors.

The way you have comported yourself through this travesty of democracy (so far) has been most gratifying for those of us who've been documenting ES&S's election shenanigans for years with little to no support.

You have buoyed us a bit.

Using the internet this way could be critical to your success. I, for one, will sign up at your website and make sure I tweet / re-post / digg / circulate and pester everyone of my contacts and what remains of our real news reporters with the details of your case.

Please continue to keep us (Bradblog readers, scattered all over the country) in the loop any and every way you can - we are most invested.

didn't know there would be a different "case" heard first. Yes, Hugo, I'm fairly certain Ludwig will bring more than Mr. Mays daughter, although her point that several people did not find her Dad's name on the ballot can only help Rawl's case that e-voting is a F'd up way to run a democracy.

sorry, that was kind of snarky. Perhaps the witness wasn't informed about presenting evidence...most citizens don't know much about the law, which is why they aren't empowered to use it in their defense.

To Duncan Buell statement about the memoyr contents being over written. the Rawl campaign MUST demand the current contents of the
PEBs
,PCMCIA cards,
iVotronic Internal flash memory
, M100, M150, M650 scanner firmware
and removable memory packs for scanners be backed up and preserved.

Even if Rawl protest fail, know how these items CAN be backed upt is important to know (for future victims)
and the backup images provide for long, detailed, and deep analysis of the software executed on election night.

In WI ES&S claims the contents of the memory units above are not possible to be backed up. I would like to have them tell SC and Rawl this as well or find out if they lied to the WI elections board and WI legislature.

To: Jeannie Dean
RE: In WI ES&S claims the contents of the memory units above are not possible

I believe ES&S is lying on this point in order to avoid complying with a 1989 law requiring the backup such memory cards and recording units. In because the law was so clear and the clerks and election board had never in 20 years made such backups, the Election Board (WI GAB) petitioned the State legislature to change the law to not require such backups.

I state again I believe ES&S lied here in Wisconsin. but they have none the lest made the statement and I would love them to repeat it or contradict it in SC.

If Rawl asks for the evidence (memory card contents) be preserved the answers are:
1) OK, here is how it done with Unity
2) Sorry that is not possible with Unity
3) here is how you can backup without Unity
4) We forbid such backing up because these election records (the contents of the memory devices) are the property of ES&S as a trade secret.

Sweet Mother of God. Can I just go off for a second, here? After years and years of heroic resistance, I just purchased an i-thingy - and yes - I AM falling in love with a device just as I'd always reasonably feared. But BEYOND that -

- it's got me thinking a LOT about voting machines because I just can't BELIEVE how perfectly calibrated they are. I mean, like ALIEN TECHNOLOGY good...

I can be on Craig's list on a 3×2 inch screen, touch an itty-bitty micro-link with my giant, "fat" finger, and it opens right up, knows exactly what I mean...

"POOR CALIBRATION" should NO LONGER BE AN ACCEPTABLE EXCUSE for these multi-million dollar national e-voting corporations!!!

The DOJ told Wisconin the the contents of memory cards are NOT election records at the term in used in USC TITLE 42->CHAPTER 20->SUBCHAPTER II->Section 1974

More precisely that is what Kevin Kennedy, executive director of the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board, claimed the DOJ told him when asked about my assertion in 2006 that memory card contents are election recrods as that term is used in State and Federal law.

1. If you are running a stealth campaign you will do as little visible campaigning as possible. You will not visit your opponent's strong holds for fear of getting his voters to turn out more heavily. So Greene did not go to the campaign events organized by the Democratic voters --- those were Rawls voters and Rawls turned them out both for the absentee votes and the polling place Greene would not want a flood of absentee votes to alert Rawls so he wouldn't promote that.

2. As to campaigning there was a write up of both candidates in the Greenville Times and it is in the surrounding counties that Greene had his best results.

If you leave out the difference between the absentees and the polling place results you are left with the argument that the results are mind-boggling and the machines were vulnerable to being hacked. You have scattered evidence from voters that the machines malfunctioned --- missing names, reports of switch from Rawls to Greene (and absence of reports of reverse) and switching of memory card mid-election which I gather is wrong. Clearly enough to an indictment but is this strong enough proof to over turn the results?

6:30pm ET: Comp Expert Buell: Actual data will be lost in next day or so, due to upcoming run-off election! (GET COURT ORDER TO KEEP DATA!!! - BF)

Perhaps the easiest way to make paper ballots more appealing is to pass a federal election law that all records from any election need to be preserved in archives for perpetuity so they can be reviews and enhance the settling of disputes. Who would oppose that? How could these machine manufacturers possibly comply, other than preserving the 'temporary' hardware which would be cost-prohibitive relative to paper...

The key problem is that Election Officials do NOT like to be second-guessed. Even those who are not corrupt (I do believe there are a few dozen across the country) do not like anybody questioning their absolute and total accuracy and authenticity.

The corrupt ones simply ignore court orders, the law, moral obligations, their oath of office, and anything that prevents them from determining the outcome they wish to achieve (Blackwell, Harris, et al.).

Those memory cards are as good as new. That is, they have been totally re-formatted and cleaned. Sadly, they aren't that expensive. You could make the cost of NEW cards a part of the election cost and keep the entire set of memory cards for each election in a manilla envelope without having to do any back-up at all.

I wasn't suggesting that EI folks have much leverage over folks like Blackwell, but it would be interesting to have Members of Congress or state exec committee members on record regarding preservation of election materials. How many of the folks voting right now to prostrate themselves before the electronic god would oppose it? Not many would be my guess. Many just spoke about how flawed the election was before voting to throw in the towel.

WTF? I spent an entire afternoon for that?! I'm sorry but those people did nothing to disabuse me of the notion that people who talk like that are not the brightest bulbs in the land. I was working to overcome my prejudice against Southern hick sounding people, but really, what's the point? Those dumb Democrats will get what they deserve, a Republican.

Dems are so spineless. What a ridiculous display by the committee. Rawl did a fine job with the evidence, given the short time frame. He really understands the issue. How are they going to proceed with this Alvin Greene character never campaigning but running for Time magazine's Man-of-the-Year award.

I have made this point is wisconsin since the summer of 2006. The contents fo teh memory cards are not elections records as that term is used in the state of Wisconsin or under federal law.

If you do I sugest you make an open records request for the memory card backups made during the November 2008 general election. You are still within the 22 month federal retention period. Further once the contents of a memeory card is entangled in an open records request it cannot be destroyed until the open records request is resolved.

Unfortunately, my computer kept getting serious malicious viruses every time I tried to view the live video of the protest hearing. These virus alerts started when I listened to Brad on radio talking about the SC Election this week. I definitely think the malicious software that infected the SC iVotronics spread to my computer.

Now that I inserted virus protection software, if you could find the video of the protest hearing that would be important.

If there is time, I say Vic Rawl should hang up his Donkey and run as an Independent. He would have an excellent chance of winning.

It totally DISGUSTS ME. Screw The Nation --- may it go the way of the (once good) New York Times.

Nation writers have differences of opinion amongst themselves. Write to the Nation. Express your concerns, back them up with facts. There is a far better chance of getting an intelligent non-condescending response from the Nation than the New York Times.

I wish I could support that, Adam F. But I was contacted and extensively interviewed by THE NATION in 2006 for my election videos of the FL-13 horror. And after months and months of courting me, interviewing me, critiquing me - not only did they never print a word about the massive mountainous evidence pointing to fraud in FL-13, but even printed an article sanctifying the bogus STATE's version of events. They printed the OPPOSITE of the Truth.

This is just further proof of how the deck is stacked against progressives / third party candidates. And how not even the damn DEMS or their so-called "progressive outlets" can admit the machines are at fault. That would be tantamount to admitting our WHOLE DEMOCRACY is A FARCE...

What's really the most "obscene" image you can show someone on a computer screen anyway? "Hey let's go to your room?" Or "Hey I got elected by cheating!!" Touchscreen indeed! "Gee I touched it and it didn't respond right!" Mr. Greene maybe has that kind of luck.

Mystery candidate says he's the best candidate for Time's 'Man of the Year'

An unemployed man who can't explain where he got the money to file as a political candidate and who is facing a felony obscenity charge will be the Democratic Party's candidate for the US Senate in South Carolina this fall

Hey, that place looks cool! I'd love to be there next to you tossing back shots and throwing money around. Cheer up, Jeannie! I had high hopes for this, too, but wasn't all that surprised, unfortunately.

The Sad Haiku (for Jeannie)

Rawl makes a good case
ignored by those attending
Greene is candidate

Go to the clown room
vodka and strippers because
South Carolina can't count.

This is it: the final proof of what we have suspected since 2004. The Democratic Party is complicit in covering up election fraud, even if it means allowing a near illiterate to run for the Senate in SC.

In 2004, we were amazed that they didn't contest and that Kerry would conceded so quickly.

In 2006, we were dumbfounded why the Dems did not contest 20 stolen House elections even though they won a landslide.

In 2010, Coakly conceded before dinner although she won the hand-counts in MA. Ted Kenne3dy is rolling over in his grave.

In Arkansas, 40 of 42 Dem precincts were closed shortly before the Senate primary. Thank you Bill Clinton and the DLC.

Election fraud is endemic and systemic.The two-party system is a sham.

The Dems and the GOP are on the same team. Both parties dedicated to keep progressives out of office.

Humans can not see electronic signals.
No chain of custody from the doping process to the poll was maintained unbroken.
It's no longer a matter of being stupid, or
plausible deniability, it's corruption, oath breaking, theft and murder.
The same oath of office breakers control us year after year, and things just get worse with our monetary system, which in turn starts to turn off the light switches on the human species. That's domestic terrorism.

From government a controlled spectrum, now bleeding over into our networks. This filthy felonious Spying, torture, electronic warfare, aerial spraying, taxing to death. It's domestic terrorism

The chilling effect to even POST THIS MESSAGE.

It's Domestic Terrorism.

They've already been busy re-writing history. So who is they?

I propose we sit down and write a list of all these foreign agents, banksters, eugenicists, and just horrible monsters and that is the new voter guide.

Yes we need help understanding this nonsense double-speak cruft going on in our propositions and state and LOCAL issues. In fact this issue squeezes all the way down to the local level.

Here's the new voter's guide.
Anything unconstitutional (or indicted and punished domestic terrorists like GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS) which was voted on, is to be un-done, rolled back, restored pristine.

AIPAC = foreign agents logan act
CFR = Foreign Agents Logan ACT
UN/UNEP/IMF = financial taxation terror, and physical terror through carbon tax - they propagate termites! and we have no filters! DHS. yeah right, fusion centers who would LOCK ME up for defending the United States Constitution.
OIL Co's. = Financial, and physical terror through price of oil.
This list will make you vomit or pass out.
Local government seems to have these ties.

Here's how I researched my candidates. (USING MANY SEARCH ENGINES --- NOT JUST FREAKING GOOGLE)

and now you know. I hate oath breakers. hate. They better hope things hold together. or I predict it will be like the dying god nothing will be able to stop it.

The worlds a pretty big place. I've done some traveling, the gulf isn't going to extinguish the planet, but it sure can potentially do some death to the Southern US Coastline. And possibly All of Cuba, MX, TX, Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama... I ain't the expert. But I had basic chem war training, and i would f-ing leave. I'd sell and leave. My intuition says people are about to die there. I'm upwind in the levee systems of Sacramento, but I find it hard to care anymore when I see Doris Matsui (the only one that cares about our levees right now) is affiliated with AIPAC. wtf!?
I mean really, is this how front running on the stock market works? I get it I do, I actually see the patterns now. I wish I could explain it but it's probably too late..

I'm just a dumb veteran, electrical, chip, electronics, and programming music and media dude

The problem we have is the problems are not being solved.

We must outlaw these electronic devices which are being exploited invisibly to harm us!

We must toss out representatives who do not represent us, and indeed are breaking their oath.

In Spartanburg County, Ludwig said there are 25 precincts in which Greene received more votes than were actually cast and 50 other precincts where votes appeared to be missing from the final count.

the sum of the parts is nevr greater than the whole

what the sc dems are telling us is that even tho,"parts" of the election results are physically impossible,they are still willing to accept the combined results..as election officials have all ovr the country for years

we are down the rabbit hole folks and i dont hold much hope that we will ever climb back out but,my dearest jeanie,i dont think it is a waste of time

as long as some of us document what has happened and pass the knowledge along at least there is hope that some time in the future a few brave patriots might lead us out back into the light of transparency,of an actual representative goverment

I wish I could support that, Adam F. But I was contacted and extensively interviewed by THE NATION ...And after months and months of courting me, interviewing me...printed the OPPOSITE of the Truth.

Wow, Jeannie Dean, that is disillusioning. I have read erroneous articles on voting machines in the Nation (and even commented on it on BradBlog), but still gave them the benefit of the doubt. I had figured that they were simply not yet fully privy to the facts, or still in denial. Now, I see that they have no excuse. As one former journalist commented in response to the end of the incompetent, disgraceful and embarrassing reign New York Times' fascist editor Clark Hoyt, journalists often get caught off from reality in a self-regurgitating bubble. Now Senator Joseph Lieberman is trying to pass a bill to strangle the sharing of facts and information on the Internet (for "security" as all tyrannies say):http://news.cnet.com/830...13578_3-20007851-38.html

Man, and I thought I was upset by the worst call in soccer history when a U.S. game-winning goal was disallowed.

Saddest thing is, and I hate to say this, it appears that despite ALL the hard work of SO many anti-E Vote activists, screaming at the top of their lungs for years that we have a sham of a voting system- and thus, a SHAM OF A DEMOCRACY(with ample evidence to prove it)- it appears to have not done a single bit of good. NOT to say Brad, Bev, the stripper and vodka-loving Jeannie Dean, nor anyone else shouldn't keep up the fight, but...

It's a singularly depressing day in the fight for clean, true and fair elections. I'm in a state of shock, and at the same time feeling like a sucker for getting my hopes up. Bring on the strippers and vodka, no, vodka and strippers!

Wow, and I haven't felt like I needed a drink in maybe ten years. Ouch.

Now he too is part of the problem because Rawl is now part of the problem because he bows to the status quo.

If he can't stand up and fight for his own rights, then how can he fight for the rights of the people of his district and his country?

Elections in this country have become a complete farce because when the going gets tough, losers like, McCain in 2000, Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 give up for no good reason, when there is compelling evidence to prove their elections were stolen.

Rawl, you are now officially a LOSER because you too have given up! How does it feel to be another member of the Hall of Shame? When will we ever get a real Democrat with some real balls?

Thanks for nothing Rawl!

And the same goes to you South Carolina Democratic Executive Board! Where are your balls? And why have you become such treasonous thugs?

In the run up to this hearing there were claims that more votes were recorded than there were voters in some precincts. I saw this claim for both the Republcan governor's race and this one. But there was nothing about it in the live blogging. Brad, was this confirmed?

As a matter of practical politics, the SC Democratic Party could not judge that machines which were adequate for deciding a race between two white men were not adequate for deciding a race between a white man and a black man short of absolute proof of chicanery.

The picture in the media of Greene is distorted. He has an unusual pattern of refusing to answer some questions --- what strategy did you use is one --- and when he does so the media claims that he can't and when he does answer something --- I have the 10,000 because I saved it over a period of two years in the military --- instead of saying that they find the answer implausible they say he didn't answer.

The notion that someone who has a bachelor's in political science from USC is illiterate is ridiculous.

Wow, Kevin S., I wouldn't put too much of this on Vic Rawl, the way I see it, he did his best to fight the ridiculously implasible and obviously stolen election, got BEAT DOWN by his own party leadership (half of whom weren't even there, anyone care to comment on that?) and then, considering there's really no more time for him to do anything about it based on the primary election rules, immediately after a gut-wrenching decision says he won't appeal. If he doesn't run as an Independent, if he doesn't say ONE MORE WORD on the issue, maybe you'll be proven correct. Your anger seems misplaced to me is my main point- though you certainly raise a valid issue, and we're on the same side to be sure. Also, based on what happenned, after he's spent months campaigning only to lose to a goofball thanks to E-voting, then get NO support from SC Dem leadership... can you blame him?

When he said he got his ten grand from military pay he was not believed because inthe previous fall he claimed to be indigent so to procure a Public Defender after he thought it was a good idea to go into a college dorm computer lad, sit next to a cute young white girl, pull up some tasty hard core porn and say, "hey baby, wanna go up to your room and try this?"

"In the run up to this hearing there were claims that more votes were recorded than there were voters in some precincts. I saw this claim for both the Republcan governor's race and this one. But there was nothing about it in the live blogging. Brad, was this confirmed?"

South Carolina's indigency standards are based on the combined income and assets of the household --- given his Dad's dire health status --- on kidney dialysis after heart surgery --- is is indeed possible that he was allowed to keep that money.

In the South I'm sure it's a felony for a young black man to show dirty pictures to a white girl but back in reality their races should be irrelevant to assessing the situation. She did right to report it because for all she knows he was a sexual predator attempting to intimidate her. On the other hand, Fox News reports that at some point she claimed that he had showed her dozens of pictures. I'll have to know more before I judge that situation.

Why did it sound like somebody was implying someone has to prove their innocene, when its really the job of the accuser to prove the defendants guilt. Its like saying "You can't prove that you didn't commit murder, even though there is no evidence to prove you did. Therefore you are guilty." Its ludacris

FOUND HIM!! Thought I'd just casually flip through all my old contacts just to see, and LO! While it's an outdated contact from 2007 and I haven't tested it - here's THE NATION fella's stats if you want to reach out and club him, and I mean that entirely as metaphor; not in a "second amendment remedy" incitement to physically club him sort-of-way. (Don't want to confuse any Sharron Angle fans who happen to be pretending to read this.)

@ Chris Hooten ~ I adore your Haiku(s)! I have re-posted them as my Facebook Status, where they will remain at the top of my Wall in impotent protest until I can emotionally settle into...whatever 'new kind of Fuckery' this is.

I have credited you as "Chris Hooten, U.S. Election Observer / Activist / Dearest Empath". Thanks, buddy. It DOES help mend a stitch or two to Grow as Muse in the face of such Ass-Slapping Proof Ginormous Chicanery, O-so Woefully UnAttended.

Yes, next time you MUST join me at Jumbo's CH; Zappa would've *loved* that.

So Somebody on 6/18/2010@9:35pm, if you spoke to someone in NY in the morning and in the evening that person called you from CA, and claimed to have ran all the way you'd give them the benefit of the doubt since you couldn't prove them wrong?

That's actually a sociopathic pattern of thinking, to rely on a dry formula rather than relying on adult judgment or commonsense (both of which sociopaths don't have) to ascertain reality.

(re: more votes than voters and vice/versy) ...was that info even entered into the record at the hearing as evidence of machine fallibility? It might've been and I just missed it...but I don't remember it at all.

Still wrastlin' with this one, but it seems to me that if Jane is right (and I feel she is) about some on the SC DEM Committee being super-skittish about being the first State to unseat a candidate via machine fraud when it's a BLACK CANDIDATE who would be expelled in a race against a WHITE one; not to mention how the opposition would then hold DEMOCRATS accountable to such fraud -

- then the IMPOSSIBLE NUMBERS (should) be instant TONIC to cure ALL false narratives / southern white guilt. At LEAST give them a data point to stand on in the face of the obvious, obfuscations /inevitable accusations of such, right?...

(@ Phil ~ I know you're not *back* or anything, but it's really good to see you. If I were the sort of gal who used emoticons, I might be inclined to use one here and now.)